Decorated Veteran beaten by BLM activists - Polidicks

[QUOTE=srobins;49755777]Yes but they asked him about BLM, he didn't respond, and then some time passed before he went outside and was attacked. I don't know if you're misunderstanding the story or if I am, but it's not like he walked outside, someone said "Hey man, you think black lives matter??" and they punched him in the back of the head while he was scratching his chin.[/QUOTE] There is a chance I might be misunderstanding the timing of events in the story to be honest.

[QUOTE=sgman91;49755766]If a group of white people called a black guy a nigger, waited for him to leave where he was, attacked him, and stole his stuff, I can't imagine we would be seeing any of this defense of their motives. They clearly showed that they had issue specifically with this guy.[/QUOTE] If it was truly an issue of a black lives movement they would've asked everyone in the mcdonald's and assault the person who gave the worst answer. They were most likely trying to get him to leave earlier sooner by scaring him off so they can mug him quicker.

[QUOTE=sgman91;49755766]If a group of white people called a black guy a nigger, waited for him to leave where he was, attacked him, and stole his stuff, I can't imagine we would be seeing any of this defense of their motives as nothing more than simple muggers. They clearly showed that they had issue specifically with this guy.[/QUOTE] That's an entirely different scenario that you set up though. They didn't use racial epithets. Nothing is indicative of it being a hate crime. Absolutely everything shows that it was a mugging. We can question their motives and form narratives in our head but there is nothing to substantiate it. You can look at literally every robbery or burglary ever and use spurrious notions of pre-meditation to suggests that the criminal had an issue specifically with the guy. It's very possible that a group of young black men women decided that since they hate white(ish?) people that they were going to go beat one up and ended up stealing their cash and cards and spending it within moments of the crime as a side affair, but nothing indicates that so far and I think it's best to withold judgement until you have all the facts. [QUOTE=srobins;49755769]Surely you understand that just because the police don't have reasonable evidence to investigate something as a hate crime, doesn't alter the reality that the attack was likely racially motivated?[/QUOTE] "likely" I'm not so sure pulling this thread is such a good idea.

[QUOTE=hexpunK;49755773]Distractions can be more than "let a buddy sneak up". Just averting somebodies attention from the situation in front of them with a direct, loaded question can do wonders for keeping them busy enough to get a free hit in. A "BLM member" using a delay in answering as a reason to actually mug a random person seems a little too convenient to have actually happened.[/QUOTE] except, again, the events did not happen at the same time they harassed him, waited for him to leave, then hit him in the head their earlier interaction played absolutely no part in the later assault.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49755806]That's an entirely different scenario that you set up though. They didn't use racial epithets. Nothing is indicative of it being a hate crime. Absolutely everything shows that it was a mugging. We can question their motives and form narratives in our head but there is nothing to substantiate it. You can look at literally every robbery or burglary ever and use spurrious notions of pre-meditation to suggests that the criminal had an issue specifically with the guy. It's very possible that a group of young black men women decided that since they hate white(ish?) people that they were going to go beat one up and ended up stealing their cash and cards and spending it within moments of the crime as a side affair, but nothing indicates that so far and I think it's best to withold judgement until you have all the facts. "likely" I'm not so sure pulling this thread is such a good idea.[/QUOTE] Well yeah I mean, it's only my opinion, but I don't think its [I]unlikely[/I] or unreasonable to suspect that there was a racial aspect to the attack considering they asked him about BLM for no real reason. I can't think of any other reason they'd bother asking their potential mugging victim whether or not he supports BLM. I'm not saying the police should be investigating as a hate crime, because I think clearly there's not enough evidence to actually go after them legally for it, but my opinion is that they had a bit of racial motivation.

I don't really think it matters whether they considered themselves members or supporters of BLM or not. What matters is that they're violent muggers. Them being violent muggers is not related to them being so-called "BLM members," nor is being a "BLM member" somehow related to somebody being a violent mugger. Beyond the point of trying to determine whether that this may have been racially motivated (I think race likely played a factor here), I don't get what the zealousness about proving whether or not they actually considered themselves activists is.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49755806]That's an entirely different scenario that you set up though. They didn't use racial epithets. Nothing is indicative of it being a hate crime. Absolutely everything shows that it was a mugging. We can question their motives and form narratives in our head but there is nothing to substantiate it. You can look at literally every robbery or burglary ever and use spurrious notions of pre-meditation to suggests that the criminal had an issue specifically with the guy.[/QUOTE] Do you honestly believe that they would have treated a black person eating at McDonalds the same way? Really? It seems like you're being purposefully dense in order to protect BLM.

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;49755810]except, again, the events did not happen at the same time they harassed him, waited for him to leave, then hit him in the head their earlier interaction played absolutely no part in the later assault.[/QUOTE] As ROFLBURGER said, it could have been a tactic to get him to leave the McDonalds. They were clearly interested in getting him outside. Also possibly bait. From my point of view, having read about people being mugged, particularly in the DC area where this is allegedly common, it's a common tactic to ask a question with no real answer that is intended to disarm, distract, or stall someone before attacking.

personally I'm more concerned as to why the [URL="http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en.html"]BLM[/URL] would be beating veterans up in the first place, but that's just me [QUOTE=Big Dumb American;49755497]Frankly, I think viewing "Black Lives Matter" as an entity is in itself pretty deeply misguided. BLM is a hashtag, not an organization. There's no membership, no group meetings, no codified goals, nothin'. "Black Lives Matter" is literally just anybody who says, "black lives matter," which ain't exactly much of a litmus test for determining how socially aware they actually are.[/QUOTE] black lives matter is a really idiotic 'movement' all in all every time I hear about it, it's always a bunch of people doing insanely stupid shit. Mainly because if black people actually wanted to make black people look good they wouldn't be acting like dumbasses and also hiding under a #tag

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;49755824]I don't really think it matters whether they considered themselves members or supporters of BLM or not. What matters is that they're violent muggers. Them being violent muggers is not related to them being so-called "BLM members," nor is being a "BLM member" somehow related to somebody being a violent mugger. Beyond the point of trying to determine whether that this may have been racially motivated (I think race likely played a factor here), I don't get what the zealousness about proving whether or not they actually considered themselves activists is.[/QUOTE] Personally, I'm not interested in connecting them with BLM. At this point I'm trying to show how ridiculous it is to defend them as nothing more than simple muggers when it's clear that it was most likely racially motivated. [editline]16th February 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Raidyr;49755836]As ROFLBURGER said, it could have been a tactic to get him to leave the McDonalds. They were clearly interested in getting him outside. Also possibly bait. From my point of view, having read about people being mugged, particularly in the DC area where this is allegedly common, it's a common tactic to ask a question with no real answer that is intended to disarm, distract, or stall someone before attacking.[/QUOTE] What's more likely: 1) A group of young muggers used racially charged language as a bait tool to get a guy to leave the establishment quickly in order to mug him outside because they didn't want to wait. or 2) We take them at their words.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49755836]As ROFLBURGER said, it could have been a tactic to get him to leave the McDonalds. They were clearly interested in getting him outside. Also possibly bait. From my point of view, having read about people being mugged, particularly in the DC area where this is allegedly common, it's a common tactic to ask a question with no real answer that is intended to disarm, distract, or stall someone before attacking.[/QUOTE] Yeah but people ask you a question and then attack you while you're distracted, they don't ask a question and then wait like 20 minutes for you to finish eating and then creep up on you later, otherwise the question had literally no effect on the mugging. It would have worked just as well, if not better, if they had just waited outside for him instead of showing their faces and making him suspicious. Plus, he would have left the McDonald's anyway, there's no need to lure him out seeing as most people don't settle in for a nice night in the McDonald's dining area :v:

[QUOTE=srobins;49755816]Well yeah I mean, it's only my opinion, but I don't think its [I]unlikely[/I] or unreasonable to suspect that there was a racial aspect to the attack considering they asked him about BLM for no real reason. I can't think of any other reason they'd bother asking their potential mugging victim whether or not he supports BLM. I'm not saying the police should be investigating as a hate crime, because I think clearly there's not enough evidence to actually go after them legally for it, but my opinion is that they had a bit of racial motivation.[/QUOTE] An important distinction needs to be made that they never asked him if he supports Black Lives Matter the movement, they asked him if he thinks black lives matter. Which is why I'm suggesting that it's more probable that they were using contemporary social commentary in an attempt to make someone they had already marked as a target rather than genuine anger that this person seems to be racist for ignoring them. [QUOTE=sgman91;49755831]Do you honestly believe that they would have treated a black person eating at McDonalds the same way? Really?[/QUOTE] I'm not sure, crime statistics for that area would be helpful in answering this question. I don't feel comfortable making assumptions based on inadequate data. [QUOTE=sgman91;49755831]It seems like you're being purposefully dense in order to protect BLM.[/QUOTE] I can't imagine there is any scenario where I can say I completely disavow Black Lives Matter and disagree with virtually every tactic and protest they have tried to use wherein you would actually believe me so feel free to think what you want.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49755860]An important distinction needs to be made that they never asked him if he supports Black Lives Matter the movement, they asked him if he thinks black lives matter. Which is why I'm suggesting that it's more probable that they were using contemporary social commentary in an attempt to make someone they had already marked as a target rather than genuine anger that this person seems to be racist for ignoring them.[/QUOTE] This is semantic nonsense. Asking if someone thinks black lives matter is equivalent to asking if a person supports the BLM movement. It was an off-the-cuff question, not some academic paper with clearly defined terms. [editline]16th February 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Raidyr;49755860]I'm not sure, crime statistics for that area would be helpful in answering this question. I don't feel comfortable making assumptions based on inadequate data.[/QUOTE] That data would be useless because aggregate data for an area tells you nothing about specific situations.

tbh we're really just arguing potentials, maybe we should have arguments for when the criminals are actually caught.

[QUOTE=srobins;49755853]Yeah but people ask you a question and then attack you while you're distracted, they don't ask a question and then wait like 20 minutes for you to finish eating and then creep up on you later, otherwise the question had literally no effect on the mugging. It would have worked just as well, if not better, if they had just waited outside for him instead of showing their faces and making him suspicious. Plus, he would have left the McDonald's anyway, there's no need to lure him out seeing as most people don't settle in for a nice night in the McDonald's dining area :v:[/QUOTE] It probably would have been a better tactic to wait outside but perhaps they have done this before and were working off experience? [QUOTE=sgman91;49755843]Personally, I'm not interested in connecting them with BLM. At this point I'm trying to show how ridiculous it is to defend them as nothing more than simple muggers when it's clear that it was most likely racially motivated.[/QUOTE] "most likely" like I said, I don't think you guys want to go pulling the thread wherein someone can be convicted of a hate crime because the jury thought the defendent was "most likely" racist. [QUOTE=sgman91;49755843]What's more likely: 1) A group of young muggers used racially charged language as a bait tool to get a guy to leave the establishment quickly in order to mug him outside because they didn't want to wait. or 2) We take them at their words.[/QUOTE] What were their words?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49755860]An important distinction needs to be made that they never asked him if he supports Black Lives Matter the movement, they asked him if he thinks black lives matter. Which is why I'm suggesting that it's more probable that they were using contemporary social commentary in an attempt to make someone they had already marked as a target rather than genuine anger that this person seems to be racist for ignoring them. I'm not sure, crime statistics for that area would be helpful in answering this question. I don't feel comfortable making assumptions based on inadequate data. I can't imagine there is any scenario where I can say I completely disavow Black Lives Matter and disagree with virtually every tactic and protest they have tried to use wherein you would actually believe me so feel free to think what you want.[/QUOTE] Make them what? What purpose is there in asking your mark whether or not they think black lives matter? [editline]17th February 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Raidyr;49755885]It probably would have been a better tactic to wait outside but perhaps they have done this before and were working off experience? "most likely" like I said, I don't think you guys want to go pulling the thread wherein someone can be convicted of a hate crime because the jury thought the defendent was "most likely" racist. What were their words?[/QUOTE] I don't know dude, I think you're giving them way too much benefit of the doubt. Is it really that hard to believe they're just some racist teenagers who wanted to mug a white guy?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49755885]It probably would have been a better tactic to wait outside but perhaps they have done this before and were working off experience? "most likely" like I said, I don't think you guys want to go pulling the thread wherein someone can be convicted of a hate crime because the jury thought the defendent was "most likely" racist.[/QUOTE] Every hate crime is based on the idea of being "most likely" based on race, religion, etc. There's literally no way to prove it beyond any doubt what-so-ever. [QUOTE]What were their words?[/QUOTE] They called him a racist because he was white and not willing to answer their question. This shows they had clear reason for disliking this guy specifically.

[QUOTE=sgman91;49755875]This is semantic nonsense. Asking if someone thinks black lives matter is equivalent to asking if a person supports the BLM movement. It was an off-the-cuff question, not some academic paper with clearly defined terms.[/QUOTE] It's absolutely not semantic nonsense and it's a critical distinction to make. Are you seriously suggesting that it's impossible for someone to say they think black lives matter then when asked if they support the BLM they have to say yes? That's absurd. [QUOTE=sgman91;49755875]That data would be useless because aggregate data for an area tells you nothing about specific situations.[/QUOTE] It would give an interesting insight to the ethnic backgrounds of perpetrators against their victims. As for specific situations in specific areas, perhaps whites are targeted because statistically they tend to have more wealth. [QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;49755882]tbh we're really just arguing potentials, maybe we should have arguments for when the criminals are actually caught.[/QUOTE] Pretty much this. I've adequately explained why the suspects aren't BLM activists and have no real interest in arguing hypotheticals. Sadly, from what I've read about the situation in DC regarding muggings like these, the criminals are unlikely to be caught and if they are, will do little to no time.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49755912] Pretty much this. I've adequately explained why the suspects aren't BLM activists and have no real interest in arguing hypotheticals.[/QUOTE] You're the one giving the most hypothetical situation of them all. You're creating plans and traps for them out of thin air instead of taking the direct explanation. There's zero reason to believe that there was some ulterior motive behind their comments other than actively not wanting to believe the easier solution.

[QUOTE=srobins;49755887] I don't know dude, I think you're giving them way too much benefit of the doubt. Is it really that hard to believe they're just some racist teenagers who wanted to mug a white guy?[/QUOTE] I'm certainly not saying that scenario is impossible, I just see no reason to assume someone is racist and therefore perpetrating a hate crime unless (or indeed until) we have absolute irrefutable evidence that it was a racially motivated crime.

Clearly those BLM members are supporting black people by doing such act Like how Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, [I]"I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up, live out the true meaning of its creed:[/I] [B]"Let's beat some poor veteran up and steal his wallet""[/B] He said that right? that's a real quote that he said back in 2015

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;49755882]tbh we're really just arguing potentials, maybe we should have arguments for when the criminals are actually caught.[/QUOTE] then what is there to even discuss?

They are probably just thugs who wanted to rob someone, who also support BLM and didn't want to mug someone who holds the same beliefs. Him refusing to outright support BLM was most likely an excuse or justification for mugging him rather than the reason.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49755531]A mugging tactic where you get as much attention as possible? [/QUOTE] uhm why not? it's literally how i got mugged a few months back (thankfully without the beating part). two guys came up to me asking a random, unrelated question then started taunting me when they were close enough. if i was a little further away from the busy street i was heading towards or walking the other direction, i don't doubt they'd have taken the chance edit: sorry, realized this may come off as misleading since the guy was asked inside the restaurant and mugged afterwards. i should've put more emphasis on the taunting because that's what they spent the most time doing in my case. my point being that they made it personal with the tone and the kind of insults they were using, because that's power tripping for you

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49755595]The power of an inaccurate headline. OP knows what he was doing. Read the article next time champ.[/QUOTE] I'm apparently a master propagandist now? They attacked someone right after mentioning an organization. If this exact scenario happened with the KKK, what would you call it?

[QUOTE=RichyZ;49755278]people will pick and choose what they want to see in a movement blm could have a peaceful protest about a clear case of police brutality with video evidence straight up showing a cop killing an unarmed surrendered man and most of fp will still try to support the cop[/QUOTE] and blm could go around beating decorated veterans for not saying that they believe in their cause and people would still try to support blm, oh wait.

i'm pretty sure they weren't part of BLM, but were just a bunch of pissy teens that wanted a fight like we didn't assume the guy that shot up that church in south carolina was from the KKK

I think if Martin Luther King were alive today and saw the things "BLM" did most of the time the man would probably clutch his chest as his body shakes around then die horribly that's not saying these teens are associated with BLM, [url]http://blacklivesmatter.com/about/[/url] but just look at this

[QUOTE=J!NX;49756549]I think if Martin Luther King were alive today and saw the things "BLM" did most of the time the man would probably clutch his chest as his body shakes around then die horribly that's not saying these teens are associated with BLM, but every time I hear of them they're doing unbelievably stupid shit[/QUOTE] A lot of the shit I see BLM heavily criticized for doing is the same shit MLK organized, but without a leader. And in MLKs time there were other black leaders organizing shit that was way worse than anything BLM has done. Malcom X preached superiority of Black people over White people, for instance.

[QUOTE=Helix Snake;49756573]A lot of the shit I see BLM heavily criticized for doing is the same shit MLK organized, but without a leader. And in MLKs time there were other black leaders organizing shit that was way worse than anything BLM has done.[/QUOTE] To be honest, the extremism in the MLK days was mostly justified, and a lot of it was kind of true. Blacks [B]were[/B] after all being systematically oppressed at the time, and a massive movement to tell whites to back the fuck off was the only thing that would have solved it. BLM is founded on cynical ideals and paranoia, rather than genuine issues like racial segregation. They were apparently founded based on the Trayvon Martin case, which didn't actually have any proof that it was racially motivated aside from speculation. Hopefully though, history remembers it how it was, a horrible tragic death and a media overblowing it. That's not to say racism doesn't exist to day, just that, they're using the MLK mentality where it doesn't belong. It's not a modern enough movement, and it does need far more organization and to focus on fixing the really awful problems we still have.